kadee79
Senior Associate
S.W. Ga., zone 8b, out in the boonies!
Joined: Mar 30, 2011 15:12:55 GMT -5
Posts: 10,807
|
Post by kadee79 on Feb 13, 2012 20:45:51 GMT -5
Well, according to the ACTUAL figures so far, Santorum is NOT ahead.... www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/republican_delegate_count.htmlRomney has 98 delegates Santorum has 47 delegates There is a lot of time & a lot of voting yet before anyone will know who is ahead to stay! There are only 2 currently still in the race that I could vote for...Paul or Romney. I would prefer Paul and may write him in if he isn't the candidate anyway! I did spell check like normal and got a giggle...Santorum = Sanatorium!!!!!!!!!
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 13, 2012 21:24:50 GMT -5
Nobody in the GOP is interested in Obamney. Mitt. Barack. I know many of you don't like to read my posts, but I'm about to explain to you why the GOP doesn't want Mitt Romney. There's a case to be made for voting for Mitt and winning at all costs- and some in the GOP will do it if they must. But for now, our singular focus is beating this guy because we know that if we nominate Mitt the following will occur:
1. Romney will reinforce the idea that there's no difference between the two parties
People like Romney are bad for the conservative brand. In the event that voters are fooled into believing that they're being given a choice and Romney is the conservative alternative to Barrack Obama, this waters down and damages the identity, message, and the damage can be devastating.
For example, Bush 43 actually tee'd up the Obama Presidency. Most voters, let alone conservatives are exasperated just thinking about Bush's last few insults- Harriet Meyers and TARP-- let alone his eight years of setting a "new tone" which meant never telling the truth about his opponents, or predecessors. It's true that you can go overboard with the blame game- Obama has shown that. But the worst attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor was 5 to 7 years in the planning and was executed just 8 months into the Bush Presidency and to this day there's been nary an official mention of Bill Clinton. Bush let Ted Kennedy write the education bill, and he expanded an already bloated entitlement on a path towards bankruptcy.
We know Mitt Romney, like Bush, will continue on a leftward, statist path. Maybe he'll go a little slower, or he'll reform a little around the edges- but as Newt puts it, Romney will just be "managing the decay" of the United States. He isn't just unable to articulate the conservative message, he's uninterested. To the extent he does, he speaks in broad brush strokes and platitudes- and he does so reluctantly in an effort to win the primary. And he often does so awkwardly- like when he said he was "Severely conservative" at CPAC. Who the hell uses "severely" as an adjective to describe their political philosophy? Or, when he tried to appeal to conservatives by saying he's "not concerned about the very poor", reinforcing the ridiculous liberal caricature if conservatives. These are just a couple of the best examples the kind of blunders that are pretty typical for Mitt. It leads us conservatives to believe we severely need a different nominee.
The next President simply must be a principles conservative with an agenda to roll back the excesses of the Obama regime AND the Bush era encroachments. The next President needs to be about restoring the Constitution — not “managing the decay".
In almost six years of campaigning, Mitt has managed to run a nearly content-free campaign. He says he's called to the job because, "I love America" but to those of us looking on at the Romney campaign, it looks an awful lot like Mitt's main reason for running is he just wants to be President. He's very good at tearing down his opponents- for every 1 ad Newt ran in Florida, Romney ran 65 ads. In Minnesota, he outspent Rick Santorum 48 to 1 and he came in third. The reason is simple: He's really good at saying why his opponents shouldn't be President, but he's done a downright lousy job telling us why he should be. At a time when the solutions have never been so obvious, when it's never been easier to inspire voters for real, substantive change, Mitt’s main campaign message appears to be: If you think I'm bad, you should see my opponent.
2. Romney will do nothing to stop America's slide into a high tax, European-style welfare state, and bankruptcy.
Nothing in Romney's public or private life suggests he will turn the ship of state around. In spite of Romney's recent conversion to born again conservative, we have very recent reasons to be concerned that he just doesn't get it. His defense of ObamneyCare during the last debate in Florida, and his recent suggestion that he would support indexing the minimum wage to inflation are just two of the scariest red flags.
His lackluster 59 point economic plan includes cutting the corporate tax rate, now the highest in the world, from 35% to 25%- what it is in most European countries. So, we're not talking Earth-shattering change here. The Wall Street Journal said his economic plan was "surprisingly timid" so much so, it "resembled Obama's [plan]".
Romney's a business man-- keep that in mind. If you passed all 59 points into law, Americans would scarcely notice a difference. Remember- Romney is a business man. And this is his STARTING POINT- which means he's got to know that he won't get everything he wants. Which means as weak and timid as his plan is, we won't even get that.
3. Within two years, but certainly within three- voters will take out their anger at Romney on the GOP in the midterms.
Americans are ready for real, substantive, large-scale change. They want ObamaCare gone. They want genuine, permanent, comprehensive tax reform. They want entitlements brought under control, they want the budget balanced, and they want issues like immigration and education dealt with. They're going to throw Obama out on his arse for a reason. And when the victor does not, cannot, or in Romney's case-- will not-- do what they elected him to do, they will punish his Party because they can't punish him.
4. Romney's Court Picks Won't Be Stellar
Probably the most compelling reason conservatives have for holding their nose and voting Romney is to deny Obama more Supreme Court picks. I submit that it's not going to matter all that much- and we know it.
5. Romney is Eager for Vindication
Mitt Romney is a moderate to liberal RINO that believes his own bullshit. He is champing at the bit to destroy the movement conservatives that he loathes. Personnel is policy, and Romney has ZERO conservatives in his inner circle now, and there's no reason to think he'd put conservatives in key positions if he is elected. He has never been involved in the conservative movement, and other than Ann Coulter he has no friends in the conservative ranks.
Romney only recently, upon deciding to seek the GOP Presidential nomination, decided to call himself a conservative. Before that he has always insisted he is a moderate independent.
Romney hates movement conservatives. He is angry that he's had to appeal to us in order to get the nomination. He and the GOP establishment elites who share his loathing of us will conduct a ruthless purge-- which will further damage the GOP, the conservative brand, and of course that further harms the country since we're the last hope this country has. Which brings me to:
6. If it's really true conservative ideas aren't salable to a majority of voters, then it really makes no difference.
If we're screwed, then we're screwed.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 13, 2012 21:35:13 GMT -5
... Which brings me to: 6. If it's really true conservative ideas aren't salable to a majority of voters, then it really makes no difference. If we're screwed, then we're screwed. Which is why I certainly hope that Santorum is nominated.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:39:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2012 21:38:05 GMT -5
Perhaps not on all points, but I think you're right Paul. can't believe I just said that. I'd be pretty peeved if I were in the GOP. They're not calling the right folks up from the bench. McCain/Palin was the wrong ticket. Romney/anybody is probably the wrong ticket. Unfortunately, I think he is the only one who comes anywhere close to being electable. Gingrich and Paul drive the conversation, which is good, but they won't win. Santorum is... well, there's a 97 page thread around here somewhere that will tell you what I think Santorum is. I don't know enough about Jeb Bush or Mitch Daniels or whoever else is in the wings for 2016, but there's got to be something better than this.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:39:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 13, 2012 21:43:40 GMT -5
Huntsman 2016...
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,612
|
Post by Tennesseer on Feb 13, 2012 21:49:48 GMT -5
"I don't know enough about Jeb Bush..."
Two Bushes were more than enough. We don't need a third.
|
|
kadee79
Senior Associate
S.W. Ga., zone 8b, out in the boonies!
Joined: Mar 30, 2011 15:12:55 GMT -5
Posts: 10,807
|
Post by kadee79 on Feb 13, 2012 22:37:54 GMT -5
"I don't know enough about Jeb Bush..." Two Bushes were more than enough. We don't need a third. You hit that nail on the head!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 13, 2012 22:46:57 GMT -5
"I don't know enough about Jeb Bush..." Two Bushes were more than enough. We don't need a third. i have serious doubts about our ability withstand a third.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 13, 2012 22:47:18 GMT -5
Again I feel the need to point out that "FRONT RUNNER" means that he has almost, almost, 1 out of every 3 Republicans supporting him, more than 2 out of 3 supporting someone else. That is before we even look at independents and Democrats.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 13, 2012 23:34:29 GMT -5
Perhaps not on all points, but I think you're right Paul. can't believe I just said that. I'd be pretty peeved if I were in the GOP. They're not calling the right folks up from the bench. McCain/Palin was the wrong ticket. Romney/anybody is probably the wrong ticket. Unfortunately, I think he is the only one who comes anywhere close to being electable. Gingrich and Paul drive the conversation, which is good, but they won't win. Santorum is... well, there's a 97 page thread around here somewhere that will tell you what I think Santorum is. I don't know enough about Jeb Bush or Mitch Daniels or whoever else is in the wings for 2016, but there's got to be something better than this. well, you are saying two different things here. i agree that Paul's post is largely on the mark, but i disagree that there is some ideal candidate out there that is better (ie more electable) than Romney. consider this for a moment. i think that it is largely true (not 100% but largely true) that the category "generic" is "ideal". when they poll for generic, i think that most people imagine the IDEAL candidate from that party. during the primary season, Romney has been within polling error of this ideal most of the way. now he is -5%, which is out of polling error, but not by much. what this tells me is that what most people think of as the ideal Republican that THEY COULD VOTE FOR is pretty damned near Mitt. now, i know that Paul doesn't like this fact. truthfully, i don't either- because as Paul rightly put it, there is not a lot of light between Mitt and Barack- and it would be really nice to vote for something other than vanilla and french vanilla. but another fact is that movement conservatism doesn't appeal to moderates and liberals.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 13, 2012 23:50:13 GMT -5
Perhaps not on all points, but I think you're right Paul. ... The only point that I would quibble over is the idea that "(n)obody in the GOP is interested in Obamney." There is about a solid third of the GOP interested. Clearly Paul is a very vocal member of the other 2/3rds. I posted this on another thread but it is very appropriate here also. Polarization also has affected the two parties differently. The Republican Party has drifted much farther to the right than the Democratic Party has drifted to the left. Jacob Hacker, a professor at Yale, whose 2006 book, “Off Center,” documented this trend, told me, citing Poole and Rosenthal’s data on congressional voting records, that, since 1975, “Senate Republicans moved roughly twice as far to the right as Senate Democrats moved to the left” and “House Republicans moved roughly six times as far to the right as House Democrats moved to the left.” In other words, the story of the past few decades is asymmetric polarization.
Read more www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/01/30/120130fa_fact_lizza#ixzz1mKKX6hpv Paul is talking about the voters who are electing those House Republicans who have moved far to the right. As one, he clearly understanding them.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Feb 14, 2012 7:56:16 GMT -5
If Santorum gets elected which I am positive he won't, we will be in war with Iran faster than anybody else being in office. All of you liberals hoping for Santorum to be the republican nominee better hope he doesn't pull off a miracle win. Santorum= another Bush.
|
|
reasonfreedom
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:50:21 GMT -5
Posts: 1,722
|
Post by reasonfreedom on Feb 14, 2012 7:59:02 GMT -5
Interesting point bills. I certainly see where the Republican party has seen a pull to the right, but I don't see a Democratitic pull to the left at all in recent years. It seems to me that they have been rather static overall, after a bit of a pull toward the center/ right during the Clinton years. Some of the congressman and senators have pulled more to the left. Obama though is neither left, moderate or right. He has totally different Ideals, that I think are plainly not working.
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Feb 14, 2012 8:47:41 GMT -5
but now that GALLUP has confirmed it, i am convinced: RICK SANTORUM IS THE NEW FRONT RUNNER. man. the GOP REALLY doesn't want Romney. astounding. dj what do you find astounding about the GOP not wanting Romney? ?? As far as I can see the main & almost only difference between Obama & Romney is their color. Politically they are just about the same except one claims to be a democrat & is a socialist & the other claims to be a republican & is a democrat. Same same as far as I can see. Like I said before I wouldn't vote for Romney because he is the same as Obama except that he "might" be a better politician & we don't need someone that's a good politician pushing socialist goals. At least Obama is inapt. who thinks he can win? i can't rule it out at this point. i have continually underestimated him. Can he win, I have no clue. My guess is that he will at least the the conservative vote & that's more than Romney could do. Your post doesnt make sence. Romney is a socialist? Santorum is no different than Romney on the economy. In fact he may even be more liberal than Romney on spending.
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Feb 14, 2012 8:49:42 GMT -5
Latest Fox news poll
Obama 51% Santorum 38%
Independents will never vote for Santorum.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 14, 2012 9:01:55 GMT -5
Latest Fox news poll Obama 51% Santorum 38% Independents will never vote for Santorum. I think you'll be surprised. Independents already voted for a huge slate of moderate to liberal Republicans in 2010. That's part of the problem we're having right now- a Congress that won't simply put its foot down and have the fight with Obama on the NUMBER ONE issue they were sent to address: Spending. There's also a lot of palpable anger at Obama, and a lot of people will blindly support ABO.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 14, 2012 9:04:04 GMT -5
Huntsman is dead. He's right up there in name recognition with John Bolton. And he's about as politically plain vanilla as you can get with the added bonus that he's pro-choice. Other than Rudy, I cannot imagine ANYONE garnering the GOP nomination taking a pro-choice stance. That debate has been settled in the GOP-- I'm not even sure Rudy could overcome it.
|
|
cme1201
Junior Associate
Tennis Elbow, Jock Itch, and Athletes Foot, every man has a sports life!
Joined: Apr 6, 2011 13:55:07 GMT -5
Posts: 5,503
|
Post by cme1201 on Feb 14, 2012 9:14:00 GMT -5
That debate has been settled in the GOP-- I'm not even sure Rudy could overcome it.
Big statement but, not based on facts. More and More republicans are seeing that the start of smaller more fiscally conservatism starts with getting government OUT of peoples lives allowing for choice and failure not "we're fiscally responsible" while looking under the covers and over the shoulder of the people.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Feb 14, 2012 9:20:02 GMT -5
Perhaps not on all points, but I think you're right Paul. can't believe I just said that. I'd be pretty peeved if I were in the GOP. They're not calling the right folks up from the bench. McCain/Palin was the wrong ticket. Romney/anybody is probably the wrong ticket. Unfortunately, I think he is the only one who comes anywhere close to being electable. Gingrich and Paul drive the conversation, which is good, but they won't win. Santorum is... well, there's a 97 page thread around here somewhere that will tell you what I think Santorum is. IMHO, Romney can't win the conservative vote and Santorum can't win the indy vote. Being a conservative independent, I don't see myself voting for either of them and will be voting Libertarian this year. It's likely going to hand deliver Obama another 4 years but I just can't bring myself to vote for either of these republicans. Jeb was pretty well liked here in FL, but being new in the state, I really didn't pay much attention. I know one piece of legislation that pissed me off was that "Terri's Law" crap he signed which allowed him to stick his nose where it didn't belong and keep Schiavo on life support against the wishes of her husband.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:39:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2012 9:21:41 GMT -5
Santorum is definately a bigger spender... he is a social conservative, not a fiscal conservative, and my hope in his garnering the nomination and being crushed in the general is that we can finally put an end to claims like yours about the GOP ... when the GOP says NO to social conservativism and YES to reasonable fiscal conservativism... then it might start to garner real, broad support again...
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Feb 14, 2012 9:23:37 GMT -5
I posted this on another thread but it is very appropriate here also. ...... “House Republicans moved roughly six times as far to the right as House Democrats moved to the left.” ..... On social issues, perhaps. Fiscally, they are no different than democrats. They all want to siphon OPM to their political cronies.
|
|
TD2K
Senior Associate
Once you kill a cow, you gotta make a burger
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 1:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 10,931
|
Post by TD2K on Feb 14, 2012 9:25:38 GMT -5
|
|
TD2K
Senior Associate
Once you kill a cow, you gotta make a burger
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 1:19:25 GMT -5
Posts: 10,931
|
Post by TD2K on Feb 14, 2012 9:26:13 GMT -5
That's not to say Virgil hasn't been known for playing tricks, do you have much interaction with him?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 14, 2012 9:33:18 GMT -5
Interesting point bills. I certainly see where the Republican party has seen a pull to the right, but I don't see a Democratitic pull to the left at all in recent years. It seems to me that they have been rather static overall, after a bit of a pull toward the center/ right during the Clinton years. I think since 2006, there's been a major lurch to the left by Democrats. I think since 2010, they've toned it down, but Obama is still pushing way, way, way to the left-- and every once in awhile, like the fight he picked with Catholics, we get a high-profile look at Obama's tendancies.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on Feb 14, 2012 9:35:00 GMT -5
Santorum is definately a bigger spender... he is a social conservative, not a fiscal conservative, and my hope in his garnering the nomination and being crushed in the general is that we can finally put an end to claims like yours about the GOP ... when the GOP says NO to social conservativism and YES to reasonable fiscal conservativism... then it might start to garner real, broad support again... I sure wish the republican party would have supported Gary Johnson more. Fiscally conservative, socially moderate...sort of a younger Ron Paul without all the baggage. I think a lot of republicans could have supported him if the GOP didn't shut him down. Johnson likely has my vote...unfortunately I doubt he has a chance as a libertarian. But, neither can any of the GOP frontrunners. I think Johnson will strip away enough of the conservative and/or indy vote to kill any chance of the republicans winning back the WH this year.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 14, 2012 9:42:29 GMT -5
I mean- let's be real here for a second, a "moderate" party doesn't make the San Francisco Treat, Nancy Pelosi, speaker.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 17, 2024 23:39:22 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2012 9:51:57 GMT -5
Interesting point bills. I certainly see where the Republican party has seen a pull to the right, but I don't see a Democratitic pull to the left at all in recent years. It seems to me that they have been rather static overall, after a bit of a pull toward the center/ right during the Clinton years. I think since 2006, there's been a major lurch to the left by Democrats. I think since 2010, they've toned it down, but Obama is still pushing way, way, way to the left-- and every once in awhile, like the fight he picked with Catholics, we get a high-profile look at Obama's tendancies. I think that's just the view from your very right-skewed vantage point.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 14, 2012 10:18:57 GMT -5
Santorum is definately a bigger spender... he is a social conservative, not a fiscal conservative, and my hope in his garnering the nomination and being crushed in the general is that we can finally put an end to claims like yours about the GOP ... when the GOP says NO to social conservativism and YES to reasonable fiscal conservativism... then it might start to garner real, broad support again... I sure wish the republican party would have supported Gary Johnson more. Fiscally conservative, socially moderate...sort of a younger Ron Paul without all the baggage. I think a lot of republicans could have supported him if the GOP didn't shut him down. Johnson likely has my vote...unfortunately I doubt he has a chance as a libertarian. But, neither can any of the GOP frontrunners. I think Johnson will strip away enough of the conservative and/or indy vote to kill any chance of the republicans winning back the WH this year. Gary Johnson would scare the crap out of independent voters. That's #1. For #2, I think that a lot of conservatives haven't figured out yet that though he is pro-choice, two things should not stop social conservatives from voting for a pro-choice libertarian: #1, as a libertarian- even if he had the power to do anything about it, he'd leave it to the States. Granted, it's a kind of whig party "free state / slave state" moral compromise-- but it'd be better than the status quo since abortion would instantaneously be illegal in 40 states; and #2 is the President has ZERO authority to change abortion law other than some federal subsidies / Mexico City policy which of course libertarians generally aren't going to support subsidies for anything. But they (conservatives) won't put up with his stance, in spite of the fact that at worst things would get marginally better; and independents would be sold a bill of goods about him being an anarchist and that'd be the end of that.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Feb 14, 2012 10:19:47 GMT -5
I think since 2006, there's been a major lurch to the left by Democrats. I think since 2010, they've toned it down, but Obama is still pushing way, way, way to the left-- and every once in awhile, like the fight he picked with Catholics, we get a high-profile look at Obama's tendancies. I think that's just the view from your very right-skewed vantage point. Well, if it isn't commonly accepted that NANCY PELOSI!!! is a far left nut, then we're screwed.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 14, 2012 10:59:13 GMT -5
I think that's just the view from your very right-skewed vantage point. Well, if it isn't commonly accepted that NANCY PELOSI!!! is a far left nut, then we're screwed. why is that? i don't see any reason to call anyone a nut.
|
|